# formats for dissertation writing

**URL:** <https://discourse.citationstyles.org/t/formats-for-dissertation-writing/127>\
**Category:** CSL Development\
**Created:** [March 6, 2006, 11:14pm UTC](https://discourse.citationstyles.org/t/formats-for-dissertation-writing/127 "2006-03-06T23:14:26Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 11\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![James\_Howison](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/ac8455/32.png) [@James\_Howison](https://discourse.citationstyles.org/u/James_Howison)\
**Post date:** [March 6, 2006, 11:14pm UTC](https://discourse.citationstyles.org/t/formats-for-dissertation-writing/127/1 "2006-03-06T23:14:26Z")

</div>

I’m working on my proposal at the moment and I’d like to decide how  
I’m going to handle the text and the references.

Historically I’ve written in LateX using TeXshop.app and managed  
references in bibtex using BibDesk.

I did once try writing with docbook NG and formatting references  
using citeproc but I found it a little difficult. Is docbook still  
the preferred format for citeproc development or has the focus  
shifted to OpenOffice? Is there currently a way to run citeproc on  
ODT formatted files?

In any case, I’d prefer to work with a readable plain-text  
representation, something like textile or markdown, so that I can  
share parts of my work for comment. That way I can copy parts into a  
word doc and send it to my committee, most of whom prefer to use the  
track changes and commenting features in word, I can then take their  
edits and comments and work the contents back into well formed  
representation ready for processing with whatever the chosen system  
is. I’m happy for the citations to be coded someway (I’ve had \citet  
{author00title} before without people freaking out.).

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Johan\_Kool1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/3da27b/32.png) [@Johan\_Kool1](https://discourse.citationstyles.org/u/Johan_Kool1)\
**Post date:** [March 6, 2006, 11:30pm UTC](https://discourse.citationstyles.org/t/formats-for-dissertation-writing/127/2 "2006-03-06T23:30:50Z")

</div>

Hello James,

You might be interested in MultiMarkDown. There is also a  
MultiMarkDown to PDF droplet on that site. References are limited  
though in that implementation.

[http://fletcher.freeshell.org/wiki/MultiMarkdown](http://fletcher.freeshell.org/wiki/MultiMarkdown)

I am currently writing in MarkDown myself. I hope that CiteProc will  
one day support it and/or if I can contribute to that. (Need to learn  
more XSLT/perl for that.)

Right now CiteProc is still in the design/implementation phase and  
not very usable yet. (You’ll need to check with Bruce to ask where  
exactly it is.)

If you need formatted references now, I think you need to look at  
LaTeX en BibTex.

Johan—  
[http://www.geo.vu.nl/~jkool/](http://www.geo.vu.nl/~jkool/)

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Bruce\_D\_Arcus1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/4bbf92/32.png) [@Bruce\_D\_Arcus1](https://discourse.citationstyles.org/u/Bruce_D_Arcus1)\
**Post date:** [March 6, 2006, 11:45pm UTC](https://discourse.citationstyles.org/t/formats-for-dissertation-writing/127/3 "2006-03-06T23:45:37Z")

</div>

> I did once try writing with docbook NG and formatting references using  
> citeproc but I found it a little difficult. Is docbook still the  
> preferred format for citeproc development or has the focus shifted to  
> OpenOffice? Is there currently a way to run citeproc on ODT formatted  
> files?

Supporting an XML input format is pretty easy, but I haven’t yet looked  
at doing ODT. I still write with DocBook.

> In any case, I’d prefer to work with a readable plain-text  
> representation, something like textile or markdown, so that I can  
> share parts of my work for comment. That way I can copy parts into a  
> word doc and send it to my committee, most of whom prefer to use the  
> track changes and commenting features in word, I can then take their  
> edits and comments and work the contents back into well formed  
> representation ready for processing with whatever the chosen system  
> is.

Ouch. It’s hard to live in a Word-dominated world, eh?

> text: markdown/textile/reST → DocBook → PDF with  
> references: BibDesk → MODS → citeproc

> (is MODS still the preferred format for citeproc?)

No, I ripped out MODS support for now (and maybe forever). I need to  
formalize it more, but the current representation is RDF, and looks  
like this (from the svn repo):

\<[http://svn.sourceforge.net/viewcvs.cgi/xbiblio/citeproc-xsl/trunk/](http://svn.sourceforge.net/viewcvs.cgi/xbiblio/citeproc-xsl/trunk/)  
data/data.rdf?view=markup&rev=19\>

> or
> 
> markdown/textile/reST → LaTeX → PDF with  
> BibDesk → bibtex → LaTeX.
> 
> The Python docutils looks interesting  
> ([http://www-128.ibm.com/developerworks/library/x-matters24/](http://www-128.ibm.com/developerworks/library/x-matters24/)), has  
> anyone successfully used those with CiteProc?
> 
> Any other suggestions?

I rather like writing in Textile and markdown myself, and it’s one of  
the reasons I wanted to port citeproc. Ruby has a nice library that can  
handle both, and which it’s easy to dynamically extend (with citation  
support, for example). IIRC, it will also be getting DocBook and TeX  
output modes soon.

But obviously that’ll take some work.

Am in a bit of hurry and will be off-line for a few days.

Bruce

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Bruce\_D\_Arcus1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/4bbf92/32.png) [@Bruce\_D\_Arcus1](https://discourse.citationstyles.org/u/Bruce_D_Arcus1)\
**Post date:** [March 6, 2006, 11:50pm UTC](https://discourse.citationstyles.org/t/formats-for-dissertation-writing/127/4 "2006-03-06T23:50:07Z")

</div>

> I am currently writing in MarkDown myself. I hope that CiteProc will  
> one day support it and/or if I can contribute to that. (Need to learn  
> more XSLT/perl for that.)

Yeah, a Perl port would make sense, though I’m rather more disposed to  
Python and Ruby. I’d say the Ruby port is maybe a couple of days from  
being finished, depending on one’s skills.

> Right now CiteProc is still in the design/implementation phase and not  
> very usable yet. (You’ll need to check with Bruce to ask where exactly  
> it is.)

Well, that’s a little strong. The current release version managed to do  
an excellent job formatting a full book manuscript. And my publisher  
was quite happy with it.

The new version in SVN is in need of testing and more tweaking I think,  
but it’s close to the same level. I expect to use it format the next  
article I submit (fairly soon).

> If you need formatted references now, I think you need to look at  
> LaTeX en BibTex.

But only if you only want PDF.

Bruce

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Johan\_Kool1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/3da27b/32.png) [@Johan\_Kool1](https://discourse.citationstyles.org/u/Johan_Kool1)\
**Post date:** [March 7, 2006, 12:02am UTC](https://discourse.citationstyles.org/t/formats-for-dissertation-writing/127/5 "2006-03-07T00:02:05Z")

</div>

> > I am currently writing in MarkDown myself. I hope that CiteProc  
> > will one day support it and/or if I can contribute to that. (Need  
> > to learn more XSLT/perl for that.)
> 
> Yeah, a Perl port would make sense, though I’m rather more disposed  
> to Python and Ruby. I’d say the Ruby port is maybe a couple of days  
> from being finished, depending on one’s skills.

I wasn’t suggesting a port to perl here actually. MarkDown is in  
perl, and in order to gain good CiteProc support would need some  
modifications, hence my reference to perl.

> > Right now CiteProc is still in the design/implementation phase and  
> > not very usable yet. (You’ll need to check with Bruce to ask where  
> > exactly it is.)
> 
> Well, that’s a little strong. The current release version managed  
> to do an excellent job formatting a full book manuscript. And my  
> publisher was quite happy with it.

That is good news! Didn’t know you had completed to whole transition  
to RDF yet.

> The new version in SVN is in need of testing and more tweaking I  
> think, but it’s close to the same level. I expect to use it format  
> the next article I submit (fairly soon).

That is text in DocBook format?

> > If you need formatted references now, I think you need to look at  
> > LaTeX en BibTex.
> 
> But only if you only want PDF.

There is LaTeX2RTF, but that’s not always optimal. (Long time ago  
that I looked at it, but it had much problems with accented  
characters amongst others.)

Johan—  
[http://www.geo.vu.nl/~jkool/](http://www.geo.vu.nl/~jkool/)

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Bruce\_D\_Arcus1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/4bbf92/32.png) [@Bruce\_D\_Arcus1](https://discourse.citationstyles.org/u/Bruce_D_Arcus1)\
**Post date:** [March 7, 2006, 12:21am UTC](https://discourse.citationstyles.org/t/formats-for-dissertation-writing/127/6 "2006-03-07T00:21:33Z")

</div>

> > > I am currently writing in MarkDown myself. I hope that CiteProc will  
> > > one day support it and/or if I can contribute to that. (Need to  
> > > learn more XSLT/perl for that.)
> > 
> > Yeah, a Perl port would make sense, though I’m rather more disposed  
> > to Python and Ruby. I’d say the Ruby port is maybe a couple of days  
> > from being finished, depending on one’s skills.
> 
> I wasn’t suggesting a port to perl here actually. MarkDown is in perl,  
> and in order to gain good CiteProc support would need some  
> modifications, hence my reference to perl.

Right; it just might be easier (or at least more elegant) to be able to  
include a citeproc module into MultiMarkDown. The author of it  
actually contacted me awhile back about citation stuff.

> > > Right now CiteProc is still in the design/implementation phase and  
> > > not very usable yet. (You’ll need to check with Bruce to ask where  
> > > exactly it is.)
> > 
> > Well, that’s a little strong. The current release version managed to  
> > do an excellent job formatting a full book manuscript. And my  
> > publisher was quite happy with it.
> 
> That is good news! Didn’t know you had completed to whole transition  
> to RDF yet.

No, that was with the MODS version. But the RDF version is working  
fairly well now.

> > The new version in SVN is in need of testing and more tweaking I  
> > think, but it’s close to the same level. I expect to use it format  
> > the next article I submit (fairly soon).
> 
> That is text in DocBook format?

Yes.

> > > If you need formatted references now, I think you need to look at  
> > > LaTeX en BibTex.
> > 
> > But only if you only want PDF.
> 
> There is LaTeX2RTF, but that’s not always optimal. (Long time ago that  
> I looked at it, but it had much problems with accented characters  
> amongst others.)

Right, I had problems as well.

Bruce

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Matthias\_Steffens](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/a88e4f/32.png) [@Matthias\_Steffens](https://discourse.citationstyles.org/u/Matthias_Steffens)\
**Post date:** [March 7, 2006, 12:28am UTC](https://discourse.citationstyles.org/t/formats-for-dissertation-writing/127/7 "2006-03-07T00:28:54Z")

</div>

Hi Bruce,

> > (is MODS still the preferred format for citeproc?)
> 
> No, I ripped out MODS support for now (and maybe forever). I need to  
> formalize it more, but the current representation is RDF

If you want to attract many developers, I think you should be _very_  
clear about the goals as well as the languages involved. No one wants  
to invest lots of development effort just to find out it was all in  
vain.

There should be a long-term strategy which you are committed to. I  
really think that this would be beneficial for speeding up development  
as well as for the project as a whole. People should get the feeling  
that it’s worth contributing to this project.

Matthias

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Bruce\_D\_Arcus1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/4bbf92/32.png) [@Bruce\_D\_Arcus1](https://discourse.citationstyles.org/u/Bruce_D_Arcus1)\
**Post date:** [March 7, 2006, 12:58am UTC](https://discourse.citationstyles.org/t/formats-for-dissertation-writing/127/8 "2006-03-07T00:58:39Z")

</div>

> If you want to attract many developers, I think you should be _very_  
> clear about the goals as well as the languages involved. No one wants  
> to invest lots of development effort just to find out it was all in  
> vain.

True; I’ll figure out a way to support MODS somehow once things  
stabilize again.

> There should be a long-term strategy which you are committed to. I  
> really think that this would be beneficial for speeding up development  
> as well as for the project as a whole. People should get the feeling  
> that it’s worth contributing to this project.

We need a language neutral-styling language (CSL) and basically an API  
to format citations.

Citeproc was originally written in XSLT 2.0, and there will always be  
an XSLT 2.0 version, but there’s no reason it should not be ported to  
other languages, including PHP. I actually think porting it will  
attract more developers.

So my roadmap is:

- get CSL to 1.0 ASAP and don’t change it for a long time
- get citeproc-xsl to 1.0 (which means it supports all the features of  
CSL 1.0 + RDF and, somehow, MODS input)
- encourage others to work with me on porting citeproc to other  
languages

I will probably be releasing something like 0.9 version of the first  
two fairly soon for testing and such and feedback. I’d like to then try  
to build up a wider range of styles to confirm CSL is solid. Once I’m  
confident in that I’ll release the final version.

I don’t care what those “other languages” are: PHP, Ruby, Perl, Python,  
Java, C++, Lua. It doesn’t matter. What matters is the logic (as  
embodied in CSL, and the API).

I can’t do all this without help though.

Bruce

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Matthias\_Steffens](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/a88e4f/32.png) [@Matthias\_Steffens](https://discourse.citationstyles.org/u/Matthias_Steffens)\
**Post date:** [March 7, 2006, 1:14am UTC](https://discourse.citationstyles.org/t/formats-for-dissertation-writing/127/9 "2006-03-07T01:14:35Z")

</div>

> > There should be a long-term strategy which you are committed to. I  
> > really think that this would be beneficial for speeding up development  
> > as well as for the project as a whole. People should get the feeling  
> > that it’s worth contributing to this project.
> 
> We need a language neutral-styling language (CSL) and basically an API  
> to format citations.

Agreed, the more language-neutral the better.

> So my roadmap is:
> 
> - get CSL to 1.0 ASAP and don’t change it for a long time

Yes, I consider this the most important part. Give developers something  
to chew on and promise them this is going to stay.

With this respect, John Gruber did an awesome job with markdown (IMHO)  
– at some point he declared the syntax as fixed for the next time  
being and did NOT attempt to do any greater changes.

And if changes get implemented, make sure that they are as backwards  
compatible as possible.

Matthias

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Johan\_Kool1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/3da27b/32.png) [@Johan\_Kool1](https://discourse.citationstyles.org/u/Johan_Kool1)\
**Post date:** [March 7, 2006, 12:19pm UTC](https://discourse.citationstyles.org/t/formats-for-dissertation-writing/127/10 "2006-03-07T12:19:42Z")

</div>

The sample command for the usage of CiteProc (in xdoc-config.xml) is  
outdated.

Usage of CiteProc:

java net.sf.saxon.Transform -o samples/test.html samples/docbook-  
test.xml lib/document/dbng-xhtml.xsl citation-style=“apa-en"  
bibdb=“flatfile” bibinfile=”…/data/data.rdf"

Johan

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Bruce\_D\_Arcus1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/4bbf92/32.png) [@Bruce\_D\_Arcus1](https://discourse.citationstyles.org/u/Bruce_D_Arcus1)\
**Post date:** [March 10, 2006, 10:54pm UTC](https://discourse.citationstyles.org/t/formats-for-dissertation-writing/127/11 "2006-03-10T22:54:28Z")

</div>

> The sample command for the usage of CiteProc (in xdoc-config.xml) is  
> outdated.

Yup.

> Usage of CiteProc:

Thanks.

Bruce